[Tagging] Highway=rest_area on bicycle or foot routes ?
baloo at ursamundi.org
Mon Jan 4 16:50:27 UTC 2021
On Mon, Jan 4, 2021 at 5:02 AM Stefan Tauner <stefan.tauner at gmx.at> wrote:
> On Mon, 4 Jan 2021 00:53:40 -0800
> stevea <steveaOSM at softworkers.com> wrote:
> > If I were a cyclist, I might feel differently if it were
> miserably-raining or hot-as-Hades, but Goodna Creek Rest Stop looks like
> more of a joke than what I would call a “Rest Stop.” I do not mean to
> offend, and I realize that automobile operators pulling into “my”
> California Rest Stop can use the restroom, fill a canteen, buy.a
> reasonably-priced ice cream bar (frozen pretty solid, even on a hot day)
> and make a phone call, all while the kids are running the dog and filling
> his water bowl after they clean up after him. THAT’S a rest stop. You can
> even do this if you are a cyclist (and the road allows cyclists, some do).
> > It would seem that in Australia and Italy, an entirely unique tag must
> be invented, or perhaps simply the individual amenities (building=roof,
> bicycle_parking=6 might be “all she wrote” for Goodna Creek) can be
> included on a node, nodes or tiny (beach-towel sized?) closed way.
> When I read the first mail in this thread I was imagining more complete
> rest areas as well like what you would find in Germany and Austria if
> they are newly built:
I wouldn't call that a rest area. Picnic area, sure.
> I wouldn't mind changing the definition of highway=rest_area to include
> such places that were built specifically for the purpose of hosting
> resting cyclists.
Eeeh, that makes an important safety distinction unclear. At proper rest
areas, parking long enough to get 8 hours of rest is either designated or
at least not unlawful. Specific facility to sleep is not necessary, but
being able to nod off for a while is.
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
More information about the Tagging